Mou Lin: In response to some netizens’ comments on “Coexistence with the virus is the rhythm of death”

2022-04-28 0 By

On February 5th, I posted an article on “Qin ‘an Strategy” titled “Coexistence with virus is the Rhythm of Death”.The reason for writing this article is that the Western politicians and media attack and interfere with China’s “dynamic zero clearance” policy without any reason. The logic is extremely reversed and the language is extremely vicious.Domestic “we media” also appeared to cater to the voice.So I wrote this article to counter the Western media and alert my compatriots.The article received more than 1,400 comments, most of which were positive and a few negative, but the comments were evenly divided in favor and against, perhaps because they did not understand the article itself, or had different views or even opposing views on China’s anti-epidemic measures.Therefore, I feel it is necessary to make further communication with netizens, so I have chosen some representative comments to make the following response.Western countries make choices according to their own situation, you should respect them.You’re not abroad. You don’t belong in someone else’s home.Just take care of yourself.Response: I did this after reading the western media’s articles attacking China’s anti-epidemic measures and the ACTIONS of American politicians interfering with China’s anti-epidemic policy. Compared with the Western media comparing China’s anti-epidemic measures to the Nazis, my language is much more peaceful.”Die” here is just an accurate description of the facts.If you read the western media’s articles attacking China’s response to the epidemic, you may feel even more indignant. Then you will not feel that I am “above you”.Respect is mutual. For example, my careful response to your comments is a kind of respect for you, and I hope to get your respect.Netizen comment: coexist with virus is death?Are influenza viruses, hepatitis B viruses included in this list?Response: In my article, I refer only to novel coronavirus, not other viruses.As for the influenza you mentioned, it has been proved that the mortality rate is very low, and the cause of death is mainly due to the co-occurrence of other diseases. Moreover, we have relatively mature influenza vaccine and relatively effective treatment methods.Hepatitis B is so low that it is not contagious unless there is deep contact with a patient’s secretions, and it is also protected by an effective vaccine.Neither of these are comparable to novel Coronavirus.You have your point of view, others have other people’s point of view, why convergence?Instead of pointing fingers, seeking common ground while reserving differences is an option.Response: Seeking common ground while reserving differences is a prerequisite. The way to fight the epidemic is related to human life, so we should not seek common ground while reserving differences.I don’t want people in western countries to die because of their irresponsible anti-epidemic policies, so why not criticize their anti-epidemic methods?Are only US politicians and media allowed to slander China’s anti-epidemic policy?The only way to deal with the epidemic is to make vaccines and specific drugs.Response: The lockdown in Wuhan and other Chinese cities at the time resulted in a period of no new cases on the mainland.The new cases were caused by imported viruses.Depending on the nature of the virus’s transmission, physical isolation is the most effective way, and the sooner the isolation starts, the better.In other words, isolation is the most scientific and effective way to eliminate the virus.The Novel Coronavirus has no host and dies after a while.Net friend comment: teacher!Why do I see a long queue at the US Embassy in Shanghai waiting for a visa interview and a long queue at the Pudong Airport waiting to fly to Europe and America?Response: Maybe everyone there has a reason to go, it’s their freedom.Perhaps they are confident that the good habits they have developed in China can prevent infection, as long as they are careful.Westerners are not even willing to wear face masks, the infection rate is so high that people who go to Europe and America should be well protected.Don’t denigrate others or other countries.Each country has its own way of dealing with it, and it is not advisable to laugh at others.Response: The western media’s denigration of China’s anti-epidemic policy is not my denigration, but my lamenting of the 2,000 people dying every day in the US.This is not just a matter of different ways of dealing with it, but also a matter of western media hoping that 6,000 to 10,000 people will die every day from COVID-19 in China, whose population is 4.2 times that of the United States.American politicians and media are naked, but you are still trying to whitewash them. Why?No one should die of COVID-19, no one should die of any infectious disease.What about lung cancer, stomach cancer, liver cancer, AIDS…Response: Cancer is not an infectious disease, AIDS is not a severe infectious disease, not comparable.If the novel coronavirus infection is allowed to spread, there will be deaths in clusters. This is not an isolated problem, so a strong response must be applied.Netizen comment: if they are really the whole population immunized, but we need drug treatment every year, how to do?Pharmaceutical company still has foreign capital share, this does not want to give laowai every year cent!Needless to say, useless, wait and see, use time to see who is right and who is wrong!Response: COVID-19 continues to mutate, and the larger the population affected, the higher the chance of mutation.The direction of variation is unpredictable, and perhaps the infectivity and fatality rate are getting higher and higher. At present, there is no evidence that universal immunity can be achieved through infection, and there is no evidence to support your hypothesis.On the contrary, the lockdown of Wuhan has answered the question of who is right and who is wrong.Since the emergence of human beings, all kinds of viruses have always coexisted with human beings, rising and falling, developing and changing. As long as human beings exist, viruses will continue to exist.Response: You are talking about generalized viruses; I am talking about novel coronavirus.Some of the most virulent infectious viruses have been eradicated by human beings, or there are ways to eliminate quickly.The current coexisting viruses have low rates of transmission, some confined to a limited range, and some have very low mortality rates (comparable to the average natural mortality rate).We cannot speak of “coexistence” in general terms; at least, at present, we do not have the conditions to coexist with the Novel Coronavirus.What western countries attack us is exactly what we want to do.But don’t make everything too political.Fighting the epidemic is also a matter of science.Response: Not being political is also my point, but fighting back against malicious slurs is forced to get political.My article is in support of a scientific approach to the problem. Physical isolation has been proven to be the most scientific, effective and thorough method for stopping novel Coronavirus transmission.Actually, wuhan, China at the beginning of the outbreak scientists need time to determine the had never seen the contagiousness of the virus and pathogenic intensity, died at the cost of so many compatriots also forced city, is that when people do not understand time is needed to make scientific judgment, the sound of a flood of Internet blame, say if seal earlier city would not be dead.At first, the Us media did not accuse China of restricting freedom in its response to the epidemic, but attacked the Chinese government for not taking timely measures and for not valuing people’s lives.In the public awareness of the noise of the public opinion is menacing.Later, the city was closed down, and they attacked China for violating human rights.These net friends probably have not forgotten?Lockdown is nothing more than quarantine!In the end, not only wuhan, all the local cases were eliminated.Doesn’t that prove that this is the correct scientific method?Wuhan lockdown, other cities did not adopt lockdown methods, but only the use of partial isolation!It means that if we catch them early and fast, we can destroy the virus without shutting down the city.The economic costs of early containment are much lower, and the impact on the functioning of the economy is much less. Doesn’t that mean that isolation is scientifically valid for the eradication of novel Coronavirus?Besides, quarantine is not the only way in China, but a combination of vaccines, medicines (Traditional Chinese medicine and western medicine under development).Isn’t this the scientific fight against the epidemic?Netizen comment: from the law of virus epidemic, theoretically the stronger the infectivity, the lower the virus fatality rate, this is common sense.Response: Having done this in the past, scientists thought it would.But Novel Coronavirus says it is the exception.Delda is more infectious and cures more diseases than its predecessor.Novel coronavirus infections were assumed to be immune, but they were not.Novel Coronavirus says it is an exception.Therefore, experience is unreliable, still less common sense.If all countries had learned from Wuhan’s experience and taken decisive local quarantine measures when the number of infections was still in the single digits, the virus would have been eliminated long ago, and there would have been no chance of mutation.Without the chance to mutate, there is no chance to challenge human “common sense”.The outcome will be known by the end of the year. Every country has to make a choice based on its national conditions. The choice is a process, not a result.Everyone is tired, and any way to bring peace to people’s lives will do.Don’t forget that vaccination is for people’s sake, not for quarantine’s sake.Response: Yes, epidemic prevention is for people.Is China trying to prevent disease for the sake of prevention rather than for the sake of people?900,000 deaths in the United States for the sake of people and not for the sake of prevention?What logic is that?900,000 lives must be lost to restore peace?Is America still at peace?With such a stark contrast and no result, is it necessary to wait for the result of more deaths?Are we still selecting ways to fight the epidemic?Netizen comment: the westerner many many, the brain is too clever than you have is, the science medical branch skill also leads the world, they see the problem and the cognition virus harm is inferior to you.Response: Some western countries are smarter than me, and their science and technology are leading the world, yet they have such a good response to the epidemic. Take the death rate of the United States as an example, which is 70 times that of China. It can be seen that the overall understanding of the virus is not as good as that of ordinary People in China.The problem is not one of cleverness or advanced technology, but one of system.Mind your own business, don’t care what others do, it’s their internal affairs, different way of thinking.Response: Netizens should see that it is not China that interferes in other people’s internal affairs.The US State Department spokesman said they had been talking to China through various levels of officials about fighting the virus, asking China to abandon its policy of fighting the virus and adopt its policy of living with the virus, which would be interference.I just want to counter the western media’s vicious attack on China, is this called interference in internal affairs?Should ONLY American officials be allowed to set fires and forbid Chinese people to light lamps?What about freedom of speech?Different ways of thinking are fine, but the results of dealing with viruses should be the same, right?Judging from the death data, the scientifically developed United States is not so bad as China.Net friend comment: coexistence is not surrender, there is vaccine and specific drugs will not appear high mortality, you can refer to the death rate of Omicron after the vaccine.Since it cannot be completely eradicated, one should try to accept it, which is another way to fight.Response: So far, no data has shown that a “magic bullet” has played a decisive role.The United States, where vaccination rates are not so low, has seen record numbers of infections.Even as the infection rate drops, the absolute number of deaths is running at 2,000 a day.Again, it’s not that it can’t be completely eradicated, it’s that the US and others didn’t want to eradicate it in the first place, and trying to accept it is a hopelessly self-deceiving choice.What is this not surrender?In the face of such a wide range of data comparison, but also for its platform, why?According to this view, whoever has the most advanced medicine is the most stupid, and vice versa, the highest level of knowledge.Be really careful what you read these days. The risk of feeling confused gets higher and higher as soon as possible.Response: America has the most advanced medicine yet 900,000 people have died.Chinese medicine is not as developed as that of the United States, and the death rate is only 1/70 of that of the United States.It’s not logical, but it is. There must be something else. Can you find out?You won’t be confused if you find it.Ok, so I’m going to pick a few representative ones, and basically take care of all the types.First, the general premise is that American science is developed, so as long as what the United States does must be scientific and unquestionable.Small premise: Living with the virus is an anti-epidemic policy invented by western countries, led by the United States.Conclusion: Coexisting with the virus is scientific and unquestionable.If you question, you don’t know science, you’re stupid, you don’t know respect.Second, the main premise: Scientific issues should not be linked to politics during the epidemic.Minor premise: The US has criticized, slandered and interfered with China’s anti-epidemic policy. That is a scientific issue.Conclusion: If the Chinese fight back against us accusations, denigration and interference, it is politically linked and is not allowed.Third, the main premise: viruses cannot be zeroed out, so they must coexist with them.Minor premise: China performs dynamic zeroing.Conclusion: China’s anti-epidemic policy is wrong.Fourth, the main premise: Chinese people should have the demeanor of a great country. They must be polite under any circumstances and never show disrespect to others.Minor premise: THE United States attacked and slandered me first, but I actually countered the Attack by the United States, using the words “killing”.Conclusion: I have not learned to respect America and lack great power demeanor.Fifth, the main premise: China and the United States have different ways of thinking, different national conditions, different anti-epidemic measures and different criteria for success.Minor premise: 320 million Americans died 900,000,000, 1.4 billion Chinese died less than 6000.Conclusion: The United States has successfully fought the epidemic, but China has failed.In fact, the logic of the fact is very simple: China has created a major premise for the world: it is possible to eliminate viruses in a certain space after a certain period of physical isolation.Because western countries headed by the United States is not willing to sacrifice for the economic loss and adopt scientific and effective physical isolation measures lead to virus, under the misleading of western politicians and media people “won’t reset” sameness “impossible to reset”, making “impossible to reset” alternative “can reset” became the major premise of now.The superficial reason for the reluctance is the fear of economic loss, and the deep reason is the government’s unwillingness to take real responsibility for human life.Therefore, the prevention of imported cases has become the main contradiction in China’s fight against the epidemic. Instead of a one-off elimination, China has to adopt a dynamic elimination, that is, to closely monitor imported cases and block the transmission caused by imported cases as quickly as possible.Globally, the process of fighting the pandemic is interminable, and coexistence seems insurmountable.Fortunately, China has made multiple preparations, seemingly anticipating that the Western community, led by the United States, will not truly fight the epidemic, but will use it for political ends and create a new opportunity for economic plunder of the world by using vaccines as a threat.So from the very beginning, China launched the development of vaccines, the development of miracle drugs and the systematic treatment of integrated traditional Chinese and western medicine.No deaths have been reported in China since the outbreak in Wuhan was brought under control.China believes that conditions for coexisting with the virus in its current state are premature.So under what conditions can we consider coexistence?Here, I would like to repeat the four conditions I mentioned in my article “On the Third off-site battle against COVID-19, and on who’s Lifting of international travel restrictions” :First, scientists and medical experts have fully grasped the characteristics and mode of transmission of novel Coronavirus infection, developed vaccines that can deal with the mutation of the virus and inexpensive and effective drugs to treat Novel coronavirus infection, and formed a set of effective medical techniques combined with traditional Chinese and western medicine for the systematic treatment of Novel Coronavirus infection.Second, the effective vaccination rate of the public has exceeded 80%, basically realizing the herd immunity in the sense of vaccination.Third, according to reliable big data statistics, the mortality rate of novel coronavirus infections is no higher than that of ordinary influenza.Fourth, there are specialist doctors treating Novel Coronavirus patients in the respiratory outpatient departments of hospitals at all levels, including community hospitals.Even if it’s just like the common cold, go to the doctor and take the medicine at home.If these four conditions are met, China can coexist with the virus.But for now we must insist on dynamic zero clearance!Note: The author of this article is Mou Lin, a core member of “Qin ‘an Strategic Think Tank”, and an original work of this platform. In the New Year, I wish everyone to join hands to defeat the epidemic, curb hegemony and move towards a better future together.